Jerusalem Online

Friday, May 20, 2011

Uprising in Middle East, North Africa


Uprising in Middle East, North Africa

According to this Uprising Map in the Middle East it looks like Iran and the Islamic terrorists under the guidance and authority of the Muslim Brotherhood that they are securing strategic key hold of entrances of the Suez Canal.
All of the uprising in the Middle East did not just happen like that. It was a man made force who incited them as well as supporting them. My hunch is that Iran under the guidance and authority of the Muslim Brotherhood group has incited and nurtured the events to fulfill their own ambitions of conquering and dominating the entire world including the USA. 
Egypt and Yemen are key strategic points to control the flow of oil and military transport to the Islamic Republics.
What is astonishing is that the Obama administration is mum on this and maybe even unaware of it. With an administration whose only interest and work at this time is to be reelected. Obama has bought changes that you better believe will destroy the United States of America.





Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/20/501364/main20064569.shtml#ixzz1MsJqqchs

PA to pay salaries to all terrorists in Israeli prisons


PA to pay salaries
to all terrorists in Israeli prisons

Financial aid to the PA from foreign donor countries
could enable funding these salaries


by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik

A law signed last month by the Palestinian Authority grants all Palestinians and Israeli Arabs imprisoned in Israel for terror crimes a monthly salary from the PA. The Arabic word the PA uses for this payment is "ratib," meaning "salary."

In 2004, the PA defined by law which Palestinians would be considered "prisoners":
"Anyone imprisoned in the occupation's [Israel's] prisons as a result of his participation in the struggle against the occupation."
[Ch. 1 of Law of Prisoners, 2004/19,
passed and published by the PA Chairman and Government, December. 2004.
The Prisoners' Centre for Studies,www.alasra.ps Accessed May 9, 2011]

In other words, all Palestinians in Israeli prisons for terror crimes officially join the PA payroll. According to the definition in the PA law, Palestinian car thieves in Israeli prisons will not receive a salary, but Hamas and Fatah terrorist murderers will.

The PA also gives a salary to Israeli Arabs convicted of terror crimes against Israel - the country of which they are citizens. PA benefits to Israeli Arab terrorists, in fact, are greater than the ones extended to Palestinian terrorists.

Those serving more than 20-year sentences will receive a greater PA salary than prisoners serving shorter sentences, the new PA law establishes. Salaries are to be paid from the day of arrest until release.

More than 6,000 Palestinian prisoners are currently serving time in Israeli prisons for terror-related offenses. Among those now eligible are Abdullah Barghouti, serving 67 life sentences; Hassan Salameh, serving 38 life sentences; and Jamal Abu Al-Hijja, serving nine life sentences, all of whom are imprisoned for planning suicide bombings. These three terrorists were recently called "heroic" by the official PA daily (see full article below.)

Funding by donor nations could enable payment of salaries to terrorists

The new PA law stipulates that payment of salaries "will be implemented... on the basis of available sources of funding." Accordingly, when the PA is short of cash for salaries, the salaries to the prisoners will be cut.

The PA has reported that the US, the EU, France, Britain, Ireland, Norway, Japan, India and the World Bank have all given money to the PA for its general budget in 2010-2011 (see donor country chart with amounts below).

Such direct funding could be part of the "available sources" for terrorist salaries, or could free money elsewhere in the PA budget that could be used for these salaries.

The list is not exclusive as it relies solely on reports in the official PA daily. The PA receives financial aid from many other donors as well.

Recently, the EU announced the transfer of 45 million euros to the PA for salaries:
"Some EUR 45 million of the funds from today's decision will go towards salaries and pensions of vital workers, mainly doctors, nurses and teachers."
 
[http://www.eu-un.europa.eu/articles/en/article_11009_en.htm
Accessed May 9, 2011]

Although the EU is not intentionally funding salaries for terrorists, its funding of other PA salaries and pensions makes money available in the general budget to pay terrorist salaries.

This Palestinian Authority law was enacted before the recent Fatah-Hamas reconciliation agreement. It was published in the official PA Registry on April 13, 2011.

The purpose of the PA salary:
1- A monthly salary to the prisoners while in prison "to provide for the needs of prisoners within Israeli prisons"
2- Additional benefits for released prisoners
3- Additional benefits for prisoners' families
4- Additional clause mandates funding "for the prisoners' legal needs"
 
Recipients: All prisoners involved in terror:
- All prisoners no matter what their crime or what their political/terror group affiliation receive the same monthly base salaries from the PA. Hundreds of Palestinian prisoners serve multiple life-sentences for murder. They all now receive a PA salary.
- The salary goes directly to the terrorist or the terrorist's family.
- The prisoners receive their salary from the time of arrest.
 
Additional salary:
- Married prisoners receive additional pay, as well as those with children.
- Arabs from Jerusalem and Israeli Arabs who are imprisoned for terror offenses, get an additional supplement of 300 Israeli Shekels (NIS) and 500 NIS respectively.
 
Funding:
- The PA law stipulates that the salaries are dependent on the PA having available cash.
 
The following is the article in the PA daily describing the new law:

"[Ali Abu Diak,] Secretary of the Central Bureau of the Prisoners' Movement, presented a concise review of the laws [concerning prisoners] published in vol. 90 of the official PA [Government] Registry, published on April 13, as follows:

1. Government resolution #19 of 2010...:
A released prisoner will be exempt from tuition fees at government schools and universities if he served a period of five years or more in prison. A released female prisoner who served at least three years in prison will be exempt from tuition fees at government schools and universities. These prisoners are entitled to transfer the exemption to one of their children, or to their spouse...
The Palestinian Authority is committed to providing the opportunity for academic study for prisoners in Israeli prisons, by covering all study expenses for all stages of university study available to prisoners.
A prisoner's children will be exempt from 80% of academic tuition fees if the prisoner was sentenced to at least 20 years and has been in prison for at least 5 years. Children of a female prisoner will be exempt from 80% of university tuition fees if the prisoner was sentenced to at least 10 years, and has served as least 3 years.
Every released prisoner will be exempt from governmental health insurance if he served at least 5 years in prison, and for female prisoners - at least 3 years. ...

2. Government resolution #21 of 2010, concerning the amendment to provide for the needs of prisoners within Israeli prisons:
a. Every prisoner will be paid a uniform sum linked to the cost of living index, as a monthly expenditure ...
b. Every prisoner will be paid a uniform sum of 400 [Israeli] Shekels for clothing. The sum will be paid twice a year, and will be added to the prisoner's salary...

3. Government resolution # 22 of 2010, concerning the amendment to provide for the prisoners' legal needs...

4. Government resolution # 23 of 2010 concerning the amendment on payment of a monthly salary to the prisoner:
Every prisoner will be granted a monthly salary, to be paid to him or to his family, on condition that he does not receive a salary from a [different] governmental or semi-governmental body or official institution... The salary will be paid to the prisoner from the date of his arrest, and a special supplement will be paid to prisoners from Jerusalem and from the Interior [i.e., Israeli Arabs]; a spousal supplement will be paid, and a special supplement for children up to the age of 18...
The minimum salary for a prisoner, to be paid to him from the beginning of his detention and for up to 3 years, is 1400 Shekels. Prisoners who have been imprisoned between 3 and 5 years will receive 2,000 Shekels. Those imprisoned between 5 and 10 years will receive 4,000 Shekels. Those imprisoned between 10 and 15 years will receive 6,000 Shekels. Those imprisoned between 15 and 20 years will receive 7,000 Shekels. Those imprisoned between 20 and 25 years will receive 8,000 Shekels. Those imprisoned between 25 and 30 years will receive 10,000 Shekels. Those who have been imprisoned 30 years or more will receive 12,000 Shekels.
A supplement of 300 Shekels will be added to the salary of every married prisoner, as well as a supplement for children up to the age of 18 in the amount of 50 Shekels for every boy or girl, in addition to a supplement for prisoners from Jerusalem in the amount of 300 Shekels, and a supplement for prisoners from the Interior [i.e., Israeli Arabs] in the amount of 500 Shekels ...
These regulations will be implemented from Jan. 1, 2011, on the basis of available sources of funding."
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, April 15, 2011]

List of donor countries who contribute to PA's general budget

The list includes only those contributions reported in the PA press, and which were designated to the PA's general budget in 2010 or 2011. The list does not include the many other contributions made to the PA by these and other donor countries:

DonorAmountSource
 European Union 158.5 million euros Al-Hayat Al- Jadida, January 20, 2010
 Britain 60 million British pounds Al-Ayyam, February 11, 2010
 India 10 million dollars Al-Hayat Al- Jadida, April 26, 2010
 Norway 53 million dollars Al-Hayat Al- Jadida, June 18, 2010
 France 19 million euros Al-Hayat Al- Jadida, June 22, 2010
 World Bank 40 million dollars Al-Hayat Al- Jadida, October 1, 2010
 Japan 18.5 million dollars Al-Hayat Al- Jadida, October 25, 2010
 European Union 41.4 million euros Al-Hayat Al- Jadida, October 28, 2010
 Britain 30 million British pounds Al-Hayat Al- Jadida, October 28, 2010
 United States 225 million dollars Al-Hayat Al- Jadida, November 11, 2010
 Ireland 1.5 million euros Al-Hayat Al- Jadida, November 15, 2010
 Japan 11.9 million dollars Al-Hayat Al- Jadida, December 28, 2010


The following is the report in the official PA daily calling prisoners "heroic":
"Family members of prisoners expressed heartfelt thanks to the directorate and staff of Voice of the Prisoners Radio, via the program 'On Birds' Wings', which is broadcast on Voice of the Prisoners. This [thanks] was due to the significant positive effect [of the station] on the mental state of the prisoners and their families, and especially the family members of prisoners who are not allowed visits. The families of the prisoners told the Prisoners' Centre for Studies that Voice of the Prisoners, [at] FM 107.9, represents an extremely important struggle and breaks the will of the prison guard in the face of the determination of the Palestinian people, which invents all methods of resistance, first and foremost the role of the media, considering the occupation's violations against the prisoners, and especially the withholding of visits for more than four years. The families of prisoners in solitary confinement, first and foremost the family of the prisoner Commander Ahmad Sa'adat, and the heroic prisoners Abbas andAbdallah Barghouti, Mahmoud Issa, Jamal Abu Al-Haija, Hassan Salameh and others, said that their sons wait for the program 'On Birds' Wings'."
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, April 13, 2011]

Abdallah Barghouti - sentenced to 67 life sentences for involvement in terror attacks in which 66 Israelis were murdered - Sbarro restaurant (Aug. 9, 2001), Moment Café (March 9, 2002), and the triple attack at the Ben Yehuda pedestrian mall (Dec. 1, 2001).

Jamal Abu Al-Hijja - 9 life sentences for involvement in suicide attacks in Hadera shopping mall (Oct. 26, 2005) and at Herzl Street in Netanya (Dec. 5, 2005)

Hassan Salameh - 38 life sentences. Was head of the terror infrastructure which carried out 2 attacks on no. 18 buses in Jerusalem (First attack on Feb. 25, 1996. Second attack on March 3, 1996), and the attack at the Ashkelon Junction hitchhike point (Feb. 25, 1996).

Mahmoud Issa - serving 3 life sentences. Member of the squad that kidnapped and murdered Israeli soldiers, including Nissim Toledano (Dec. 13, 1992).

PMW has not been able to find any information concerning Abbas Barghouti. 


Excerpt from EU's announcement of additional aid to the PA: 

"EU Commission approves additional € 85 million in support for Palestinian people in 2011"
"Summary: The European Commission has today decided to provide an additional financial package worth EUR 85 million for the occupied Palestinian territory under the 2011 budget. This comes in addition to the € 100 million already approved from European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument.
...
Some EUR 45 million of the funds from today's decision will go towards salaries and pensions of vital workers, mainly doctors, nurses and teachers. A further EUR 40 million will be allocated for social allowances to vulnerable Palestinian families. These funds come in addition to the EUR 60 million provided to the Palestinian Authority (PA) and the EUR 40 million provided to United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) at the beginning of the year. At the request of Prime Minister Fayyad these funds have been advanced by an accelerated procedure in order to meet the Authority's urgent financial needs and to respect the EU's commitment to being a regular and reliable donor."
[http://www.eu-un.europa.eu/articles/en/article_11009_en.htm
Accessed May 9, 201

Thursday, May 19, 2011

The Fallacy of the “1967 Borders” – No Such Borders Ever Existed


*     *     *
The Fallacy of the “1967 Borders” – No Such Borders Ever Existed

Alan Baker

  • The Palestinian leadership is fixated on attempting to press foreign governments and the UN to recognize a unilaterally declared Palestinian state within the "1967 borders." Indeed, this campaign appeared to have some initial successes in December 2010 when both Argentina and Brazil decided to recognize a Palestinian state within what they described as the "1967 borders."
  • But such borders do not exist and have no basis in history, law, or fact. The only line that ever existed was the 1949 armistice demarcation line, based on the ceasefire lines of the Israeli and Arab armies pending agreement on permanent peace. The 1949 armistice agreements specifically stated that such lines have no political or legal significance and do not prejudice future negotiations on boundaries.
  • UN Security Council Resolution 242 of 1967 acknowledged the need for negotiation of secure and recognized boundaries. Prominent jurists and UN delegates, including from Brazil and Jordan, acknowledged that the previous lines cannot be considered as international boundaries.
  • The series of agreements between the PLO and Israel (1993-1999) reaffirm the intention and commitment of the parties to negotiate permanent borders. During all phases of negotiation between Israel and the Palestinians, there was never any determination as to a border based on the 1967 lines.
  • The PLO leadership solemnly undertook that all issues of permanent status would be resolved only through negotiations between the parties. The 2003 "Road Map" further reiterated the need for negotiations on final borders.


With ongoing and increasing intensity, the Palestinian leadership is fixated on advancing a concerted policy vis-Ă -vis the international community and public opinion, demanding recognition of what they claim to be the "1967 borders," and acceptance of a unilaterally declared Palestinian state within those borders. Indeed, this campaign appeared to have some initial successes in December 2010 when both Argentina and Brazil decided to recognize a Palestinian state within what they described as the "1967 borders."1 

In actual fact, the Palestinian leadership, as well as members of the international community, are well aware that such borders do not exist, nor have they ever existed. They have never figured in any of the international, agreed-upon documentation concerning the Israel-Arab and Israel-Palestinian issues, and have no basis whatsoever, neither in law nor in fact. 

There are no provisions in any of the agreements signed between Israel and the Palestinians that require withdrawal to the "1967 borders." There were never any geographic imperatives that sanctify the 1967 lines. Clearly, there could be no legal or political logic to enshrining as an international boundary an inadvertent and coincidental set of ceasefire lines that existed for less than 19 years 

While the above is fully evident to the Palestinian leaders who are actively and daily advancing this policy - principally the head of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, and the head of the Negotiations Department of the Authority, Sa'eb Erekat, both of whom were themselves actively involved in all the stages of negotiation - they nevertheless continue with their fixation to present the concept of the "1967 borders" as an accepted international term-of-art and as an Israeli commitment. 

The following is a summary of the background to the 1967 lines as described in the international documentation: 


UN Security Council Defines Initial Ceasefire Lines 

The term "1967 lines" refers to the line from which Israel military forces moved into the territories at the start of hostilities on June 4, 1967 ("The Six-Day War"). 

These lines were not based on historical fact, natural geographic formations, demographic considerations, or international agreement. In fact, they had served as the agreed-upon armistice demarcation lines from the termination of the 1948 War of Independence, pursuant to the armistice agreements signed between Israel and its neighbors Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon in 1949. These lines remained valid until the outbreak of the 1967 hostilities. 

The armistice demarcation line represented nothing more than the forward lines of deployment of the forces on the day a ceasefire was declared, as set out in Security Council Resolution 62 of November 16, 1948, which called for the delineation of permanent armistice demarcation lines beyond which the armed forces of the respective parties will not move. The line was demarcated on the map attached to the armistice agreement with a green marker pen and hence received the name "Green Line." 

The Security Council in its resolution stressed the temporary nature of the armistice lines that were to be maintained "during the transition to permanent peace in Palestine," intimating that permanent peace would involve negotiating permanent bilateral borders that would be different from the armistice demarcation lines.2 


1949 Armistice Agreements 

In fact, the Israel-Jordan Armistice Agreement signed on April 13, 1949, as well as all the other armistice agreements, emphasized the transitional nature of the armistice as "an indispensable step toward the liquidation of armed conflict and the restoration of peace in Palestine." The language of the agreement went to great pains to stress that the armistice lines were of a provisional and non-political nature and were not intended to, and did not constitute international boundaries, and as such do not prejudice the rights, claims, and positions of the parties in the ultimate peace settlement:
"No provision of this Agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either Party hereto in the ultimate peaceful settlement of the Palestine question, the provisions of this Agreement being dictated exclusively by military considerations."3

"The basic purpose of the Armistice Demarcation Lines is to delineate the lines beyond which the armed forces of the respective Parties shall not move."4

"The provisions of this article shall not be interpreted as prejudicing, in any sense, an ultimate political settlement between the Parties to this Agreement."5

"The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in...this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto."6

Subsequent Views on the Transitional Nature of the Lines 

Statements from Arab and other sources between 1949 and 1967 confirm the common understanding as to the transitional nature of the lines. During the debate in the Security Council before the outbreak of hostilities in 1967, the Jordanian ambassador stated:
"There is an Armistice Agreement. The Agreement did not fix boundaries; it fixed a demarcation line. The Agreement did not pass judgment on rights political, military or otherwise. Thus I know of no territory; I know of no boundary; I know of a situation frozen by an Armistice Agreement."7
Prof. Mughraby wrote in the Beirut Daily Star:
"Israel is the only State in the world which has no legal boundaries except the natural one the Mediterranean provides. The rest are nothing more than armistice lines, can never be considered political or territorial boundaries."8
President Lyndon Johnson is on record stating:
"The nations of the region have had only fragile and violated truce lines for 20 years. What they now need are recognized boundaries and other arrangements that will give them security against terror, destruction and war."9

In this context, international jurists have also acknowledged the limited effect of the armistice lines:
Elihu Lauterpacht, in his booklet, Jerusalem and the Holy Places, states: 
"Each of these agreements...contains a provision that the armistice lines therein laid down shall not prejudice the future political settlement. It would not therefore be accurate to contend that questions of title...depend on the Armistice Agreements. Questions of sovereignty are quite independent of the Armistice Agreements."10
Judge Steven Schwebel, former President of the International Court of Justice, stated in 1994:
"The armistice agreements of 1949 expressly preserved the territorial claims of all parties and did not purport to establish definitive boundaries between them."11

Security Council Resolution 242, 1967 

The transitory nature of the 1949 armistice demarcation lines was clearly acknowledged by the Security Council in Resolution 242 of 1967, after the "Six-Day War," which affirmed, in its first paragraph:
"...respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."12

There is no call in this resolution for a return to the armistice demarcation lines or to any other line or border. The Security Council specifically dismissed the Arab demand for a text that required Israel to completely return all the territory it occupied during the 1967 conflict. Israel was called upon to withdraw from "territories occupied in the recent conflict," not from "all the territories" or even from "the territories." At the same time, the Council called upon the parties to work together to promote agreement on a peaceful and accepted settlement in accordance with the provisions and principles of the resolution. Clearly this settlement was intended to include the negotiation of secure and recognized boundaries that would replace the armistice demarcation lines, pursuant to the above references in the armistice agreements to the same "ultimate peaceful settlement."
During the Security Council debate on the acceptance of Resolution 242, the representative of Brazil, in accepting the resolution, declared:       
"Its acceptance does not imply that borderlines cannot be rectified as a result of an agreement freely concluded among the interested States. We keep constantly in mind that a just and lasting peace in the Middle East has necessarily to be based on secure permanent boundaries freely agreed upon and negotiated by the neighboring States."13

Israel-Palestinian Declaration of Principles, 1993 

While this fact has been widely acknowledged in both legal and political literature throughout the years,14 the basic reciprocal undertaking by the Palestinian and Israeli leaderships to negotiate borders between their respective territories was given formal confirmation by Yasser Arafat, his deputy and later replacement Mahmoud Abbas, and Sa'eb Erekat during the groundbreaking "Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements" (signed inter alia by Abbas) of September 13, 1993, in which the PLO and the Government of Israel acknowledged that the negotiations on the permanent status of the relationship between them would cover: 
"...remaining issues, including: Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, relations and cooperation with other neighbors, and other issues of common interest."
On the eve of the signature of the above declaration, Arafat made the solemn commitment in a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin:
"The PLO commits itself to the Middle East peace process, and to a peaceful resolution of the conflict between the two sides and declares that all outstanding issues relating to permanent status will be resolved through negotiations."15

Clearly, the present, ongoing fixation by Arafat's successor, Mahmoud Abbas, and his chief negotiator, Sa'eb Erekat, in attempting to bypass the agreed-upon negotiating process and achieve unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state within the "1967 borders" runs squarely against Arafat's solemn undertaking in the name of the Palestinian people in 1993.


Israeli-Palestinian Agreements, 1993-1999

The above references to permanent status negotiations on borders and to achieving the aims of Security Council Resolution 242 were repeated in a series of mutually agreed documents entered into between the PLO and the Israel Government.16 Furthermore, with a view to strengthening this commitment, they undertook in the 1995 Interim Agreement not to act unilaterally to change the status of the territories pending outcome of those permanent status negotiations:
"...neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations."17

This undertaking was reiterated by the parties in Article 9 of the 1999 Sharm el Shiekh Memorandum:
"Recognizing the necessity to create a positive environment for the negotiations, neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in accordance with the Interim Agreement."

Throughout all the phases of the negotiations on these various agreements and memoranda between Israel and the Palestinians, and in the texts of these documents, there was never any reference to the 1967 lines as a potential border between the two neighbors, nor was there any reference to any commitment or obligation by Israel to withdraw to the 1967 lines. 


Road Map, 2003 

Further indication of the non-existence of "1967 borders" and the rejection of any unilateral act by the Palestinians is evident from the terms of the Quartet-initiated "Performance-Based Roadmap to a Permanent Two-State Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict" of April 30, 2003.18 In this document the parties were expected, in the second and third phases of implementation of the "Road Map" and after election of a responsible Palestinian leadership, to engage in negotiation focusing on the option of creating an independent, viable Palestinian state, initially with "provisional borders." This was intended to serve as a way-station to the permanent settlement that was scheduled for the third stage, where final status borders would be recognized by an international conference convened for that purpose. 

Clearly, if and when the parties return to a modus of bona fide negotiation and reach the issue of defining their mutual border, the 1967 line could indeed figure as a point of reference in the negotiations between them, assuming that it answers the criteria set out by the Security Council for a border that will avoid situations of threats of force and violence. 

But this can only emanate from a reciprocal and good faith attempt by the parties to act together, and not unilaterally, in determining their own borders, based on their mutual interests as neighbors. Such issues cannot and must not be dictated from outside, whether by the UN or by individual states. 

Thus, in light of all the above, the question arises if and when the Palestinian leadership will come to admit the absurdity in attempting to invent "1967 borders" that obviously lack any historical, legal, or factual basis?

Similarly, one may ask when they will see the utter lack of pragmatism and realism in their attempt to dictate to the international community a unilateral Palestinian state in violation of their own commitments, undermining the internationally accepted Middle East peace process as well as internationally recognized and witnessed documents. 






*     *     *





1. For the text of the Argentinean declaration, see http://www.mrecic.gov.ar/. The text of the Brazilian declaration may be found at
2. S/RES/62 (1948)S/1080, 16 November 1948.
4. Article IV(2).
5. Article VI(8).
6. Article VI(9).
7. 1345th meeting of the Security Council, May 31, 1967.
8. Beirut Daily Star, May 28, 1967.
9. Department of State Bulletin 33, June 19, 1967.
10. Elihu Lauterpacht, Jerusalem and the Holy Places (London, 1968), p. 45.
11. Justice in International Law, Selected Writings of Judge Stephen M. Schwebel (Cambridge University Press, 1994).
13. S/PV.1382(OR), 22 November 1967. See also Alan Baker, "Recognition of a Palestinian State - Premature,
14. For example, see Prof. Ruth Lapidoth, "Security Council Resolution 242 at Twenty Five," Israel Law Review, vol. 26, 1992, pp. 295-318. Ministry for Foreign Affairs: The First Fifty Years (Jerusalem, Keter), vol. 4, pp. 840-853 (Hebrew).
15. Exchange of letters between Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin, July 9, 1993, http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace+Process/Guide+to+the+Peace+Process/Israel-PLO+Recognition+-+Exchange+of+Letters+betwe.htm.
16. See, for example, the "Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip," Washington, D.C., September 28, 1995, Preamble,http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace+Process/Guide+to+the+Peace+Process/THE+ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN+INTERIM+AGREEMENT.htm; and see the "1999 Sharm el-Sheikh Memorandum on Implementation Timeline of Outstanding Commitments of Agreements Signed and the Resumption of Permanent Status Negotiations," 4 September 1999, Article 1.
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/1990_1999/1999/9/Sharm+el-Sheikh+Memorandum+on+Implementation+Timel.htm.
17. Article XXXI (7).

Thursday, May 12, 2011

Why Koreans study Talmud


Why Koreans study Talmud

Close to 50 million South Koreans read collection of Jewish writings in school in bid to become 'geniuses like the Jews,' ambassador explains
Tzofia Hirschfeld
Published: 05.12.11, 08:10 / Israel Jewish Scene

Almost every house in South Korea has a translated Talmud. Moreover, the South Koreans have made the collection of ancient rabbinic writings on Jewish civil and religious law part of their school curriculum's compulsory literature.

From Israeli Eyes
China good for the Jews  /Ronen Medzini
A book titled 'the Jews – why are they rich?' would be considered anti-Semitic in every other country in the world. In China, however, it's a sort of compliment. Ronen Medzini elaborates on the Chinese people's idolization of the Jewish mind
Full story
But unlike Israel, even Korean mothers study it and read from it to their young children. Yes, in a country of almost 49 million people who believe in Buddhism and Christianity, there are more people who read the Talmud – or at least have a copy of it at home – than in the Jewish state. Much more.

 

'This way we'll be geniuses too'

"We were very curious about the Jews' outstanding academic achievements," explains South Korean Ambassador to Israel Young Sam Ma, who was a guest on Channel 1's "Culture Today" show.

"The Jews have a high percentage of Nobel Prize laureates in all fields: In literature, science and economics. It's an amazing achievement.

"We tried to understand the secret of the Jewish people. How do they – more than other nations – manage to reach such impressive achievements? How is it that Jews are such geniuses? The conclusion we reaches is that one of your secrets is studying Talmud.

 
Korean version of Talmud (photo courtesy of South Korean Embassy)

"Jews read the Talmud from an early age, and we believe it helps them develop great abilities. This understanding led us to the conclusion that we should also teach children Talmud. We believe that if we teach our children Talmud we could also be geniuses. And that's what stands behind the decision to integrate the Talmud into the school system in South Korea."

Young says he himself has been reading the Talmud since a very early age. "It's considered very significant studying," he stresses. "The result is that there are more Koreans who have a copy of the Talmud at home than Jews in Israel.

"I, for example, have two sets of Talmud – one of them was bought by my wife and the other I received as a gift from my mother-in-law."

Fans of Jews

The Koreans are fond of the Talmud not just because they believe it advances the genius quality, but because they have found values close to their heart in it.

"The Jewish tradition emphasizes family values," explains the South Korean ambassador. "You can also see it today, in your custom to convene every Friday for a family meal.

"In my country the family is very important too. The way older people are treated, the respect and appreciation Judaism has for the elderly, are parallel to the high appreciation the elderly get in my country."

 
Korean bookshelf (photo courtesy of South Korean Embassy)

"Another significant thing is the attitude towards education. In the Jewish tradition there is a duty to teach the children, and a lot of attention is devoted to it. Among Korean parents, the children's education is the top priority as well.

"I think that this similarity led to the fact that today you can see in the United States Korean immigrants following in the Jews' footsteps and succeeding in the same areas the Jews succeed in."

The love of Talmud was followed by appreciation in additional fields, including culture. "The Jews like culture and art. I live in Rishpon, which is a small Moshav, and an art and music gallery opened there last week," the ambassador says.

"I was impressed by the fact that even a small moshav has a home for culture. We don't have the options you have, but we learn from you in this area too and invest as much as we can in order to enjoy these fields like you."

Twins (well, almost)

And if you thought this is where the connection ends, think again: The Jewish biography, which looks pretty unique to us, reminds the Koreans of their own.

"I find many similarities between us – the Jews and the State of Israel," the ambassador says. "Both you and we have a long history with great difficulties. Israel and South Korean became received their independence in the same year, 1948, so we are the same age, 63. We, like you, have problems with hostile neighbors. We, like you, hardly have any natural resources and we must rely mainly on our human capital.

"In its 63 years of existence Israel has greatly developed. It created miracles in its economy, and so did we. The people in Israel are similar to the South Koreans in their courtesy as well as in the impatience they show, sometimes.


"When people complain about the way you drive, I say that I find it very convenient driving here because you act on the road like we do. You also have a warm heart, like the Koreans, and therefore I think Israelis and Koreans can befriend each other easily, because we are emotionally similar.

"I found out that when an Israeli befriends you, he helps you without expecting anything in return. This is why I cherish my friendship with Israelis. We learn from you all the time."

Monday, May 9, 2011

Judaism, Animals, and Vegetarianism


Judaism, Animals, and VegetarianismFrench translation
"G-d's tender mercies are over all of His creatures." (Psalms 145:9)
Judaism requires humane treatment of animals. The Jewish concept of tsa'ar ba'alei chaim, the obligation not to cause pain to animals, is one of the most beautiful elements of Jewish thought. Jewish tradition is filled with compassion for animals, and strongly opposes the infliction of suffering on another living creature. Let's take a look at what Judaism says about our proper treatment of animals.
Many stories from Jewish tradition reflect our concern for animals. In one beautiful story from Midrash:
While our teacher Moses was tending the sheep of Jethro in the wilderness a lamb ran away from him. He ran after her until she reached Hasuah. Upon reaching Hasuah she came upon a pool of water [whereupon] the lamb stopped to drink. When Moses reached her he said, "I did not know that you were running because [you were] thirsty. You must be tired." He placed her on his shoulder and began to walk. The Holy One, blessed be He, said, "You are compassionate in leading flocks belonging to mortals; I swear you will similarly shepherd my flock, Israel." (Exodus Rabbah 2:2) 
Judaism is clear in mandating concern for animals. The Bible tells us explicitly, "The righteous man regardeth the life of his animal."(1) In Exodus, G-d insists that "If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee laying under its burden, thou shalt surely not pass by him; thou shalt surely unload it with him."(2) The Code of Jewish Law states, "It is forbidden, according to the law of the Torah, to inflict pain upon any living creature. On the contrary, it is our duty to relieve pain of any creature, even if it is ownerless of belongs to a non-Jew."(3) The Talmud explains that the obligation to relieve an animal from pain or danger supercedes rabbinic ordinances related to the Sabbath.
Indeed, the welfare of animals is so important that the fifth commandment mentions them specifically, and they too must be allowed to rest on the Sabbath.(4) The great Torah commentator Rashi explained that this means animals must be free to roam on the Sabbath day, and graze, and enjoy the beauties of nature.
The Talmud futher insists that "A person should not eat or drink before first providing for his animals."(5) Indeed, the Shulchan Aruch tells us it is so important that our animals not go hungry while we eat, that a person is legally authorized to interrupt the performance of a rabbinic commandment in order make sure this has been done.
In Deuteronomy, the Torah instructs us not to take the mother bird and its young together.(6) Maimonides explains this injunction is meant to prevent causing the mother pain at seeing its young taken away. The Torah further commands us, "ye shall not kill [an animal] and its young both in one day," of which Maimonides says is "in order that people should be restrained and prevented from killing the two together in such a manner that the young is slain in the sight of its mother, for the pain of animals under such circumstances is very great. There is no difference in this case between the pain of people and the pain of other living beings, since the love and the tenderness of the mother for her young ones is not produced by reasoning but by feeling, and this faculty exists not only in people but in most living things."(7)
The rabbis further demonstrated their concern for animals by so strongly disapproving of sport hunting, that the Talmud prohibits even association with hunters.(8)
The laws of kosher slaughter also reflect a deep reverence for the welfare of animals. According to Jewish law, the shochet (slaughterer) must be a pious and learned man, the animal must be perfectly healthy, the knife must be perfectly smooth with no imperfections that may cause momentary pain at the point of death, and the animal must be killed with one quick cut severing the major arteries to the brain. Thus, Judaism requires that if an animal is to be killed, even its moment of death must be as quick and painless as possible.
Indeed, there are so many commandments mandating humane treatment for animals that the rabbis explicitly declared consideration for animals a biblical law. As the Talmud states, "Great importance is attached to the humane treatment of animals, so much so that it is declared to be as fundamental as human righteousness."(9) As Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch wrote, "Here you are faced with G-d's teaching, which obliges you not only to refrain from inflicting unnecessary pain on any animal, but to help and, when you can, to lessen the pain whenever you see an animal suffering, even though no fault of yours."(10) Tsa'ar ba'alei chaim is such an important idea in Judaism, that chief rabbi of England J.H Hertz said, "It is one of the glories of Judaism that, thousands of years before anyone else, it so fully recognized our duties to (animals)." It is absolutely clear that concern for the welfare of animals is an obligation for Jews.
For more on this subject, read Judaism and Animal Rights by Richard Schwartz
The way animals are treated on farms today violates Jewish teachings. 
Judaism is unequivocal in requiring us to treat animals humanely. How do these important Jewish teachings on compassion for animals apply to what we eat?
If you're like most people, you imagine a farm the way storybooks portray them, with chickens scratching around in the dirt, pigs rolling together in the mud, and cows peacefully grazing out at pasture, the animals living a happy, idyllic life until coming to a quick and painless death at the hands of the slaughterer. This picture is far from reality. These kinds of farms, the norm back in Biblical and Talmudic times, have virtually disappeared in modern America. The mass production techniques which drove our industrial revolution now dominate our farms as well, and today large agribusiness conglomerates have nearly obliterated the traditional family farms that once dotted our landscape. Over 90% of animals on U.S. farms today are raised using intensive rearing methods, on modern "factory farms." Listen to what happens on these factory farms, and consider how the way animals are raised for food today fits in with our Jewish tradition of compassion for animals.
Chickens, for instance, are raised in absolutely atrocious conditions. Those raised for meat live their short lives entirely indoors, never seeing grass or sun or sky, crowded so tightly that each chicken, with a wingspan of 2½ feet, has on average a mere 6/10 of a square foot in which to live its life. Their droppings are not cleaned, so they spend their entire lives in their own filth. As a result of the ammonia, dust, and disease in the air, farmers complain of sore eyes, coughing, and even chronic bronchitis, and have been warned to avoid entering these areas. If that's true for the farmers, what must it be like for the chickens, who must live their entire lives breathing this air? They all develop respiratory problems as a result, and the ammonia burning their eyes sometimes leads to blindness. Farmers use hormonal and genetic manipulation to make the chickens grow seven times faster than normal, which puts such stress on their bodies that 90% of the chickens suffer leg deformaties, and some just flip over in convulsions and die. Though their normal lifespan is 15-20 years, they are slaughtered at just 7 weeks of age, because if allowed to grow longer, mortality rates surge due to heart attacks, infections, and other diseases. Under these conditions of extreme stress and frustration, the chickens will actually peck each other to death, a behavior virtually unheard of under normal conditions where chickens can establish a natural "pecking order." Farmers deal with this loss to profitability not by alleviating the conditions which lead to such behavior, but by cutting their beaks with a hot knife. This is not a painless procedure like trimming nails, since the birds have sensitive nerves in their beaks, and indeed for some chickens this creates so much pain that they cannot eat and starve to death.
Chickens raised for their eggs have it even worse. After hatching, since male chicks are useless to the egg industry, they are simply thrown into plastic bags where they suffocate under one another, or are thrown alive into grinders to be fed to their sisters. The females are raised in wire cages stacked one on top of the other, so excrement drops from one cage onto the birds below. The birds are generally packed 4-7 birds to a cage the size of a folded newspaper. They cannot stand or perch comfortably on the unnatural slanted wire floor. The result is severe discomfort and serious leg deformities, and their nails can get caught in the wiring leaving them completely immobile. It is typical for one hen to be consistently trampled underfoot by the others. Hens also have a strong need to lay their eggs in privacy, an urge shown in studies to be as strong as the urge to eat after being starved for a day. Of course, privacy is completely impossible under these conditions. Other urges, like dust bathing and nesting, are also completely frustrated. In time, the rubbing of their bodies against the wires causes their feather to fall out and their skin to be rubbed bright red and raw. Indeed, it appears that the birds are driven literally insane by their treatment, as indicated by their hysterical noisiness among naturally rather quiet animals. Conditions are so bad for these layers, 20-25% of them die before slaughter at less than 2 years of age. By the time they're killed, due to confinement and transport, 88% of then hens have broken bones. What's more, when the layers end their egg cycle, they are often "force-molted." This involves leaving them without food in complete darkness for sometimes up to 18 days, in order to shock their bodies into starting another cycle. The birds can lose more than 25% of their body weight in this process, and it is common for 5-10% to die. And egg-laying chickens, like the rest, end up in slaughter.
The cows we eat are routinely branded, receiving third-degree burns; their horns are either torn out or gouged out; and they are castrated. All without anesthetic, of course. Most dairy cows are tied in place for their entire lives, unable even to walk around. To keep their milk flowing, they are impregnated every year, and their calves are taken away immediately so as not to waste any of the milk. This is causes great suffering to both mother and child, and a cow will often bellow for days after its baby. Except for the few added to the dairy line, these babies all become veal, to be raised in darkness and isolation in stalls too small to lie down in, fed iron-free diets to keep them anemic, and slaughtered at just six weeks of age. The dairy industry and the veal industry are the same industry. Giving birth constantly wears the cows' bodies down, so that these animals who normally live to 25 years are spent by the time they're six, and sent to slaughter like the rest.
All these animals endure transport to slaughter for up to days without any food or water, sweltering under the summer heat or freezing to death in the harsh winter. At the slaughterhouse, they are beaten with electric prods, including in their eyes and anuses, to get them to go up the chute as they smell the blood and hear the screams of the animals before them. They are hung in the air by their back legs, which bruises or breaks them. For non-kosher meat they are supposed to be stunned, but with a documented 25% failure to stun rate, they routinely have their limbs chopped off, their skin peeled off, and they are dropped into tanks of scalding water, all while fully alive and conscious. This is the horrific, bloody end to their life of misery. And all just because we like the taste of meat.
How does this fit in with the Jewish mandate not to cause pain to any animal? How does their lifelong confinement compare with Rashi's statement that they must be free to roam and enjoy the beauties of nature on the Sabbath day? How is their starvation through weather extremes during transport to slaughter consistent with the mandate that we must not ourselves eat before making sure our animals are provided for, even if this interrupts a rabbinic commandment? How does the dairy industry's practice of removing the calf from its mother just after birth, compare to Maimonides' words that "there is no difference in this case between the pain of people and the pain of other living beings"? How can we as Jews, who are not permitted even a small notch in the knife used for killing an animal lest it cause momentary pain, who are not permitted to take the young away in the mother bird's presence lest it cause her grief, who are not even allowed to associate with hunters, how can we inflict all this suffering on so many of G-d's creatures, about whom the Torah tells us "the L-rd is good to all, and his tender mercy is over all his creatures"? Where is the mercy here for these pitiful animals?
It is clear that the Torah envisages a peaceful, happy life for animals, and that if they are to be killed for food, they should end their happy lives quickly and painlessly. Today in America, however, we cannot eat animal products without directly participating in cruelty of unfathomable proportions. Each year, in the US alone, 10 billion warm-blooded animals are slaughtered for food. Compare that to the human population of the entire earth of 6 billion, and there is no comprehending the amount of suffering involved. We cannot be compassionate, we cannot abhor cruelty, we cannot be true to the beautiful decency and caring for animals written into the Torah which G-d gave us, indeed, we cannot be good Jews, as long as we continue to pay for the torment of these abused souls.
Jews have known too well the bitter taste of cruelty and oppression, and Jews have remembered our tragic history when we have seen others suffering under the cold hand of persecution. Jews have taken leadership roles in the battles for worker’s rights, for civil rights, and even today Jews have worked to help the plight of the Kosovo refugees. Let us not forget the suffering we have experienced as a people when it comes our turn to choose whether others will be brutalized at our hands, every time we sit down to dinner. As Nobel prize winning Jewish author Isaac Bashevis Singer wrote, "...as long as human beings will go on shedding the blood of animals, there will never be any peace... There will be no justice as long as man will stand with a knife or with a gun and destroy those who are weaker than he is." Let us, as Jews, who have helped change the world for the better so many times before, continue to spread the concept of tikkun olam, of repairing the world, to the countless animals who live, and die, in abject misery.
Millions of people are going vegetarian every year. Please consider becoming a vegetarian yourself, so that we as Jews can help create a more compassionate world.
 

NOTES 
(1) Proverbs 12:10 
(2) Exodus 23:5
(3) Rabbi Solomon Granzfried, Code of Jewish Law, New York: Hebrew
Publishing Co., 1961, book 4, Chapter191, 84.
(4) Exodus 20:8-10, Deuteronomy 5:12-14 
(5) from Deuteronomy 11:15 
(6) Deuteronomy 22:6-7 
(7) Maimonides, Guide for the Perplexed, 3:48 
(8) Avodah Zorah 18b 
(9) Philip Birnbaum, Encyclopedia of Jewish Concepts,
p. 92
(10) Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, Horeb, Chapter 60, Section 416